IBJNews

Ex-councilor Bateman sentenced to 27 months in prison

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

Paul C. Bateman Jr., a former Democratic city-county councilor, was sentenced on Monday to 27 months in prison for his part in defrauding an Indianapolis physician of $1.7 million.

Bateman, 58, pleaded guilty in Jan. to 13 counts of money laundering and fraud related to the scheme. On Monday, U.S. District Judge Tanya Walton Pratt also ordered Bateman to serve supervised release when he leaves prison.

Partner Michael Russell pleaded guilty to fraud charges and was sentenced on May 14 to more than four years in prison. Manuel Gonzales, a third man indicted in the fraud scheme, was acquitted by a federal jury in February of three counts of wire fraud and three counts of money laundering.

Bateman, along with Russell, has also agreed to pay back the $1.7 million they obtained from Dr. Arthur Summral.

According to the federal indictment, Russell—also known as Rev. Michael L. Russell—co-founded The Russell Foundation in 2003 and proposed that the foundation fund itself through the production and distribution of ethanol. Bateman served as chief administrative officer and chief corporate officer of the foundation.

According to prosecutors, Russell approached the physician in January 2007 during a medical appointment about making an investment in an entity later established as Indiana Ethanol Capital Investments LLC. Russell and Bateman attended several meetings with the doctor at a Denny's restaurant to further sell him on the investment.

Russell told the physician that the ethanol operation could reap an $18.5 million return on a $600,000 investment, and that he would be the last of 12 people to invest in it. In fact, the doctor was the only investor.

From February to April 2007, according to court documents, Bateman picked up five checks from the victim for the ethanol investment totaling $702,000, most of which was deposited into Bateman’s personal account.

Later in 2007, Russell and Bateman again solicited money from the victim, successfully urging him to invest $1 million in a corporate bond for the Russell Foundation, according to U.S. attorneys.

A large portion of the investor's money was spent on cars, custom clothing, home furnishings, entertainment and “elaborate security details” that included members of the Indianapolis Metropolitan Police Department, the indictment said.

Bateman also used $22,187.60 to pay his income taxes, according to the indictment.

Prosecutors said Bateman used his public position to lend credibility to the foundation. Bateman was a city-county councilor for six years, leaving office when his term ended in 2011.

“The U.S. Attorney’s Office cares about one thing, and one thing only: the truth,” U.S. Attorney Joe Hogsett said Monday in announcing the sentence. “That is what the citizens expect and deserve from their public servants, and together with our law enforcement partners, we’re working to bring this culture of corruption to
an end in Indianapolis and across the state.”

ADVERTISEMENT

  • corrupt?
    A corrupt Democrat ha surprised the media didn't stash this story in the archives. Show me a dem that isn't corrupt or full of fraudulent crony politics and i'll be more surprised. This guy needs a minimum of 10 years, not a measly 27 months.
  • Really?
    27 months, REALLY? That is certainly a deterrent to anyone else considering fleecing the public. Did they at least say he would have to stay in prision the entire time with no early release then work the rest of his life to repay the money?

Post a comment to this story

COMMENTS POLICY
We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
 
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
 
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in IBJ editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
 
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
 
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
 

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT

facebook - twitter on Facebook & Twitter

Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ on Facebook:
Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ's Tweets on these topics:
 
Subscribe to IBJ
  1. You are correct that Obamacare requires health insurance policies to include richer benefits and protects patients who get sick. That's what I was getting at when I wrote above, "That’s because Obamacare required insurers to take all customers, regardless of their health status, and also established a floor on how skimpy the benefits paid for by health plans could be." I think it's vital to know exactly how much the essential health benefits are costing over previous policies. Unless we know the cost of the law, we can't do a cost-benefit analysis. Taxes were raised in order to offset a 31% rise in health insurance premiums, an increase that paid for richer benefits. Are those richer benefits worth that much or not? That's the question we need to answer. This study at least gets us started on doing so.

  2. *5 employees per floor. Either way its ridiculous.

  3. Jim, thanks for always ready my stuff and providing thoughtful comments. I am sure that someone more familiar with research design and methods could take issue with Kowalski's study. I thought it was of considerable value, however, because so far we have been crediting Obamacare for all the gains in coverage and all price increases, neither of which is entirely fair. This is at least a rigorous attempt to sort things out. Maybe a quixotic attempt, but it's one of the first ones I've seen try to do it in a sophisticated way.

  4. In addition to rewriting history, the paper (or at least your summary of it) ignores that Obamacare policies now must provide "essential health benefits". Maybe Mr Wall has always been insured in a group plan but even group plans had holes you could drive a truck through, like the Colts defensive line last night. Individual plans were even worse. So, when you come up with a study that factors that in, let me know, otherwise the numbers are garbage.

  5. You guys are absolutely right: Cummins should build a massive 80-story high rise, and give each employee 5 floors. Or, I suppose they could always rent out the top floors if they wanted, since downtown office space is bursting at the seams (http://www.ibj.com/article?articleId=49481).

ADVERTISEMENT